Menu

One graph that ends the climate change debate

Page 8 of 9

Premise: So let’s put the empirical evidence of the anthropogenic global warming debate to bed once for all.

Riddle: Are adherents going to try to tell us that their one little “hottest year on record” graph that is filled with preposterous presumptions is a more accurate picture of the history of the global temperatures than my two comprehensive graphs that utilize no presumptions and respectively contain 108 times (9 X 12) more data and 156 times (13 X 12) more data for the equivalent time periods?

A revealing method of comparing datasets is to superimpose them on each other.

“2014 hottest year on record”

Here is what our “hottest year on record” graph looks like when it is inserted into our multiple datasets graphs:

It is now evident that there is nothing special about the “hottest year on record” dataset graph. When superimposed on the above graph it is obvious that it too is median-bound like the other datasets, with 23 years above the zero anomaly line, and 25 below, all more or less evenly distributed. So, just like the other nine datasets, it does not show any global warming trend from 1931 to 1979, but instead confirms dataset consolidation. What about the 1990 to 2014 graph?

Conundrum: It is now abundantly clear that the “hottest year on record” dataset graph, even with all of its presumptions, exaggerations and deceptions, does not in fact support anthropogenic global warming theory any more than do the other thirteen datasets in aggregate.

Challenge to Adherents: I defy anthropogenic-global-warming-adherents to produce even one dataset graph which can be superimposed on the above datasets graphs that will convincingly contradict the observed temperature dataset consolidation from 1931 to 1979, and from 1990 to 2014.

Conclusion: The observational empirical evidence of climate science has spoken. All of the global temperature empirical evidence contradicts the deeply flawed theory of anthropogenic global warming.

Punch Line: Even the adherent-establishment’s own poster child graph is a joke at their expense.